What the data for this category looks like
Core data for vulnerability scanning services comes from vulnerability scanners, enterprise asset inventories, public CVE databases, and official patch announcements. Four standardized document types are produced regularly:
- Scanning plans: Mark asset scope and scanning cycles
- Vulnerability lists: List CVE IDs, severity levels, and repair statuses
- Remediation work orders: Link corresponding assets and vulnerabilities
- Rescan reports: Record verification results after remediation
Data update frequency follows a weekly or monthly schedule.
What constraints these characteristics impose on the "multi-turn dialogue and prompt engineering" workflow
The data structure for this category is fixed and has strong relational links. Multi-turn dialogue must accurately match the field association logic of different documents to avoid mixing cross-document fields. The weekly or monthly update rhythm requires dialogue context to support regular synchronization of the latest CVE database and patch data, preventing use of expired vulnerability information. For time-consuming steps such as asset scope confirmation and false positive exclusion, dialogue requirements must support calling context by document type, while limiting the number of fields loaded per dialogue turn to avoid exceeding processing limits. Remediation work order and rescan report association verification requires dialogue to recognize dependencies between fields to ensure accurate verification logic.
How to configure settings
The following configurations are formulated for FastGPT v4.17.0.
| Configuration Item | Recommended Setting | Rationale |
|---|---|---|
variables configuration | Bind asset scope and CVE ID variable pools | Enable automatic filling of corresponding business fields during multi-turn dialogue, reducing manual input errors |
Historical messages count | Top 8–12 entries | Cover the complete dialogue chain for change reviews, retaining context of initial scan findings and subsequent remediation requests |
| Dialogue timeout threshold | 45–60 seconds | Match the daily review rhythm of security operation teams, avoiding process interruptions |
| Context window limit | 10000–14000 token | Adapt to the total character count of the four business document types, avoiding truncation of critical vulnerability information |
chatId association rule | Bind single scan task ID | Ensure multi-turn dialogue context in the same scenario does not become mixed, isolating dialogue data from different scan tasks |
Three common configuration errors
- Symptom: Global variables only display a small number of entries, and preset business variables such as asset scope and CVE IDs cannot be called. Cause: Full variable call permission is not enabled in the application configuration, or preset variable pools are not resynced after a version upgrade.
- Symptom: Vulnerability information returned by dialogue does not match current CVE database data, with expired entries included. Cause: Context periodic refresh logic is not configured, and outdated vulnerability data loaded initially is still used.
- Symptom: Context is mixed across tasks during multi-turn dialogue, with asset scopes from different scan tasks being combined. Cause: Single scan task ID is not bound via
chatId, leading to interference between different dialogue contexts.
How to confirm configuration is complete
- Enter the application's variable configuration panel, confirm that preset asset scope, CVE database, and patch announcement variables are fully loaded with no missing entries.
- Initiate a simulated dialogue, enter "Query the asset scope of the current scan plan", confirm that the dialogue can correctly call the corresponding variable and return accurate content.
- Initiate a multi-turn dialogue: first enter "Confirm the assets involved in this change", then enter "View the pending repair vulnerabilities for this asset", confirm that the context can correctly associate the business logic of the two dialogues.
- Trigger a context refresh operation, confirm that the vulnerability information returned by the dialogue matches the latest official patch announcement content.
The values provided are common starting points and should be measured against the reader's own samples.
Question material comes from public community discussions. Configuration values are common starting points and should be measured against your own samples. Verified on 2026-10-19.